Castner contends, in support of his motion to dismiss the
indictment in 53 CR 192, that the acts charged in the indictment
do not constitute an offense against the laws of the United
States. Quinn makes a similar contention in support of his motion
to dismiss the indictment in 53 CR 204.

The elements of the offense with which defendants are charged
are outlined in Section 50 of Title 15 in these terms:

"Any person who shall willfully make, or cause to
be made, any false entry or statement of fact in any
report required to be made under sections 41-46 and
47-58 of this title, or who shall willfully make, or
cause to be made, any false entry in any account,
record, or memorandum kept by any corporation subject
to said sections, or who shall willfully neglect or
fail to make, or cause to be made, full, true, and
correct entries in such accounts, records, or
memoranda of all facts and transactions appertaining
to the business of such corporation * * * shall be
deemed guilty of an offense against the United States
* * *."

Section 50 was enacted in 1914 to insure obedience to the
investigatory powers of the Federal Trade Commission; seven years
later, in the Packers and Stockyards Act, the provisions of
Section 50 were made applicable to certain classes of persons
engaged in the business of buying and selling livestock in areas
supervised by the Secretary of Agriculture. Section 402 of said
Act provides:

"For the efficient execution of the provisions of
this chapter, and in order to provide information for
the use of Congress, the provisions (including
penalties) of sections 46 and 48-50 of Title 15, are
made applicable to the jurisdiction, powers, and
duties of the Secretary in enforcing the provisions
of this chapter and to any person subject to the
provisions of this chapter, whether or not a
corporation. The Secretary, in person or by such
agents as he may designate, may prosecute any inquiry
necessary to his duties under this chapter in any
part of the United States."

First. Section 402 employs segments of statutory provisions
originally designed to supplement the powers of the Federal Trade
Commission, and, more particularly, the provisions and penalties
of Section 50, originally limited to matters within the
jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission, are made applicable
to persons engaged in certain well-defined agricultural work. If
this is the meaning of Section 402 — and the clear terms of the
Section permit no other meaning — then the relation of Section 50
to the work of the Federal Trade Commission is not material to
the questions now before the court. In short, the sanctions of
Section 50 may serve one purpose as part of Title 15, and another
purpose when incorporated into the Packers and Stockyards Act.

This construction of Section 402 is consonant with decisions
approving the incorporation of parts of Section 50 into another
statute. Section 9 of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938,
29 U.S.C.A § 209, provides:

Section 9 has been considered by the Supreme Court on several
occasions, and that Court has never disapproved of the manner in
which the Section introduces parts of Title 15 into the Fair
Labor Standards Act. See, for example, Cudahy Packing Co. v.
Holland, 1942, 315 U.S. 357, 62 S.Ct. 651, 86 L.Ed. 895. Further,
courts have applied parts of Title 15, as incorporated into the
Fair Labor Standards Act, with little difficulty. For example,
Section 49 of Title 15 delegates certain subpoena powers to the
Federal Trade Commission; similar powers are delegated to the
Administrator of the Wage and Hour Division of the Department of
Labor by the Fair Labor Standards Act, which contains a bare
reference to Section 49. In Lowell Sun Co. v. Fleming, 1 Cir.,
1941, 120 F.2d 213, affirmed by an equally divided Supreme Court,
315 U.S. 784, 62 S.Ct. 793, 86 L.Ed. 1190, the court simply
substituted the word "Administrator" for the word "Commission" in
Section 49, and held that powers delegated to the Commission in
Section 49 were similarly delegated to the Administrator by the
incorporation of Section 49 into the Fair Labor Standards Act.
This is a simple construction, one that is in keeping with the
clear terms of the statutes.

It is clear, therefore, that indictments brought under Section
402 of the Packers and Stockyards Act need not allege that the
defendants are subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade
Commission, or that the offense involved a corporation required
to report to the Commission, or that a falsified report was
required to be made to the Commission. These and other
jurisdictional facts are perhaps essential to indictments
restricted to violations under Section 50; but they are not at
all material to indictments brought under the Packers and
Stockyards Act. That Act contains its own jurisdictional
requirements, and these are adequately alleged in the
indictments.

Second. The provisions and penalties of Section 50 were added
to the Packers and Stockyards Act "for the efficient execution of
the provisions" of the Act, and "in order to provide information
for the use of Congress". 7 U.S.C.A. § 222. Of course, the need
for the additional provisions and penalties is not subject to
judicial inquiry; but the court may properly determine whether
the conduct described in the indictments is the type of conduct
which Congress intended to proscribe when Section 50 was
incorporated into the Packers and Stockyards Act.

It is charged in one indictment that Quinn made false entries
on scale tickets issued by him at the Stock Yards; in the other
indictment, it is charged that Castner caused Quinn and others to
make such false entries. Scale tickets such as those described in
the indictments are issued by weighmasters at the Stock Yards
pursuant to the regulations of the Department of Agriculture. The
regulations specifically provide that whenever livestock is
weighed for the purpose of purchase or sale, a scale ticket
"shall" be issued. Copies of tickets issued by weighmasters at
the Stock Yards must conform to prescribed standards, and must be
retained in the files of the stockyards owner. 9 C.F.R 201.49.
Castner and Quinn contend that these regulations may not be used
to classify scale tickets as "reports required to be made" by the
Union Stock Yards, since the Secretary of Agriculture must enter
appropriate findings before determining the manner and form in
which reports are to be made. 7 U.S.C.A. § 221. However, the
Secretary may certainly require that persons within his
jurisdiction, including the Stock Yards, keep routine records of
their daily transactions; indeed, such records are essential to
the exercise of the broad rule-making powers vested in the
Secretary. Clearly, falsification or alteration of scale tickets
might hamper the Secretary of Agriculture in the performance of
duties imposed by the Packers and Stockyards Act; or, to turn to
another announced need for the imposition of the sanctions of
section 50, false scale tickets might provide less accurate
information for the use of Congress. The court concludes that the
acts described in the indictments are prohibited by Section 402
of the Packers and Stockyards Act, including by reference Section
50 of Title 15.

Third. Section 401 of the Packers and Stockyards Act enables
the Secretary of Agriculture to investigate misconduct in areas
within his jurisdiction and, if misconduct is found, Section 401
prescribes a penalty. Admittedly, administrative action is
prerequisite to conviction of an offense under Section 401 of the
Act. Defendants carry this proposition one step further: they
argue that Sections 401 and 402 are complementary, not exclusive,
and that some sort of prior administrative action by the
Secretary is essential to conviction of offenses introduced into
the Act by Section ...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.